It’s a political whodunnit that intersects with the country’s culture wars just as the veeptakes reach a fever pitch.
J.D. Vance’s Wikipedia edit was updated Tuesday to bring his views on abortion more in line with those of former President Donald Trump, according to an online log of changes. But who was behind it?
The Ohio senator is one of the frontrunners being mentioned as Trump’s veep.
And the edit will only add to the intense speculation that a decision has already been made, as the editor’s username was “Chuengsteven,” a not-so-veiled reference to Steven Cheung, the Trump campaign’s chief spokesman.
The user account was created Tuesday morning and a small adjustment was made to Vance’s page.
“He has also said that abortion laws can be made by states,” was changed to: “He recently said that abortion laws should be made by states.”
Ohio Senator JD Vance is one of the top candidates to be named Donald Trump’s running mate. He once supported a federal ban on abortions after 15 weeks
It’s a small but potentially significant change that could address a potential weakness for Vance when it comes to campaigning alongside Trump.
In the past he has said he supported a national 15-week abortion ban, but late last year (after Ohio voters supported abortion protections) he conceded that most Americans did not support a blanket ban.
By contrast, Trump danced around the issue before finally announcing in April that the restrictions should be left up to the states.
The online adaptation narrows the differences between Vance and his potential boss, at least as far as Wikipedia users are concerned.
And then ‘Cheungsteven’ disappeared.
But who was responsible? Was it a Vance loyalist who cleaned up social media and tried to convince the Trump campaign that their man was aligned with the former president?
Was it a Biden aide who got up to mischief?
Or did Cheung, a seasoned political operative, make a mistake by giving the game away?
No, he told Dailymail.com.
The original says Vance has expressed support for a federal abortion ban after 15 weeks. “He also said abortion could be mandated by states,” the report continues
The updated version also says he may support a federal ban, but continues, “He RECENTLY said abortion laws SHOULD be determined by the statistics.” A subtle but important change
The change was made by an editor with the username ‘Cheungsteven’
Trump Campaign spokesman Steven Cheung said the edit had nothing to do with him and instead pointed the finger at the Biden campaign
“If I wanted to secretly edit a Wikipedia page, I wouldn’t use a username that was my own name,” he said.
Instead, he proposed a smear by the Biden campaign in an attempt to stir up trouble.
Sarafina Chitika, spokesperson for the Biden-Harris campaign, said: “We have no idea what this man is talking about.”
A cybersecurity expert and a source at Wikipedia both said it was impossible to trace the user.
The mystery comes at a time of feverish interest in all potential VP picks and their records.
Donald Trump will face off in the first presidential debate with Joe Biden in Atlanta on Thursday evening, amid reports he could announce his running mate this week.
Or the big reveal could come during the run-up to the Republican Party convention in Milwaukee next month, when Trump officially becomes the party’s nominee.
The issue of abortion could be a point of contention there as delegates determine the party platform.
Finished the spin room for the upcoming debate in Atlanta, Georgia
The existing platform, agreed to in 2016 and unchanged when Trump returned to power in 2020, calls for a federal ban on abortions after 20 weeks and calls for an amendment to the Constitution that gives the unborn the same rights as a person.
Anti-abortion groups fear an attempt to soften the policy and bring it in line with Trump’s ‘leave it to the states’ approach.”
This is not the first time Wikipedia edits have been used to promote or punish political figures. The history of the online encyclopedia is littered with mischief.
In 2006, a Wikipedia investigation found that dozens of examples of pages related to politicians had been edited by their staffers, sometimes from IP addresses associated with the House of Representatives or the Senate.
They included Biden staffers who removed or changed details of plagiarism episodes and refocused discussion of a possible 2008 White House election campaign to portray it in a more favorable light.
Sometimes edits have taken on a geopolitical character, indicating the involvement of government agencies. For example, in October 2019, the BBC reported a wave of questionable pro-China editorials on 22 politically sensitive articles about Taiwan or pro-democracy movements in Hong Kong.